Outstanding Art/Photo Website award to wedding/portrait photographer

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Wayne J. Cosshall, Nov 13, 2006.

  1. Hi All,

    I've given a Nov 2006 Outstanding Art/Photography Website Award to Nadia
    Salameh Photography, a great wedding/portrait photographer who also does
    some stunning personal work:
    <http://www.dimagemaker.com/specials/website.php>

    Congratulations Nadia.

    Cheers,

    Wayne

    Wayne J. Cosshall
    Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
    Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/
    Publisher, Experimental Digital Photography
    http://www.experimentaldigitalphotography.com
    Coordindinator of Studies, Multimedia and Photomedia, Australian Academy
    of Design
    Personal art site http://www.artinyourface.com/
     
    Wayne J. Cosshall, Nov 13, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Wayne J. Cosshall

    lubecki Guest

    Hmm... maybe I just don't like wedding photography, but most of the
    photos on her site are completely soulless and saccharine. Not much
    interesting stuff at all.

    And it's a Flash website with a freaking intro. Yuck.

    -Gniewko
     
    lubecki, Nov 13, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Forest Wanderer, Nov 14, 2006
    #3
  4. Wedding photography does have constraints, since you must meet the
    client's requirements and expectations. It is not my personal idea of
    fun either. Did some. Decided I didn't like it. However, by commercial
    standards I think Nadia's work is great, pleasing work.

    I know what you mean about flash intros, but this one did not bother me,
    at least the first time to the site. So I did not discount the site
    because of it.

    Cheers,

    Wayne
     
    Wayne J. Cosshall, Nov 14, 2006
    #4
  5. Thanks, I'll consider it.

    Cheers,

    Wayne
     
    Wayne J. Cosshall, Nov 14, 2006
    #5
  6. Wayne J. Cosshall

    Alan K. Guest

    With regard to the site, I've got to go with Gniewko on this one for a
    number of reasons.

    First, not everyone has broadband. Second, not everyone has *fast*
    broadband. Third, not everyone wants to chew up their broadband quotas
    on Flash fluff. Fourth, it has sound (music) that plays by default,
    which is a complete and utter no-no IMHO. There's nothing more
    annoying than opening a web site at the office or at home when someone
    in the next room is sleeping, and suddenly having Kenny Bloody G (or
    something that sounds very similar) blasting out of the speakers
    whether you want it to or not. (Especially when at dial up speed the
    music keeps stopping and starting which is, curiously, even more
    irritating than when it plays constantly. At least there was an Off
    option, but Off should be the default.) Fifth, I WAS going to say that
    the site was missing the all important "Skip Flash Intro" link that
    web designers should be forced to put on EVERY Flash-containing web
    site upon pain of something being done to them which involves very hot
    and very pointy pokers. However it appears that not only is the intro
    done in Flash, the *Whole Frappin' Site* is done in Flash which makes
    it slower than an arthritic tortoise on a dial up connection and makes
    it impossible to load the thumbnails of different galleries in tabs in
    Firefox. Sixth, I sometimes (randomly rather than constantly) found it
    difficult to determine a causal relationship between the thumbnail
    that my mouse was resting on, and the image that appeared at the top.

    IMHO, any web site that is all Flash or doesn't allow you to bypass
    Flash should be automatically out of the running for ANY web site
    award until such time as everyone has bandwidth that is about 10 times
    as fast and a hundredth of the cost.

    Maybe it was done via Flash to make it harder for people to pilfer
    copies of the shots. But whatever the reason, I hereby appoint myself
    Grand Inquisitor of the Campaign For the Reclaiming of the Web for
    True HTML. (That's GIOTCFTROTWFTH to you.) To the barricades,
    citizens!

    (For the humour-impaired, there was a " 8^> " involved in the last
    paragraph, but not in the second-last one.)
     
    Alan K., Nov 14, 2006
    #6
  7. Wayne J. Cosshall

    JC Dill Guest

    Hear hear!

    Ditto to everything else Alan said as well.

    jc
     
    JC Dill, Nov 14, 2006
    #7
  8. Wayne J. Cosshall

    Rick Sciacca Guest

    I don't know how anyone can justify not having broadband now. What? You like
    to wait for pages to load? :)
     
    Rick Sciacca, Nov 15, 2006
    #8
  9. Wayne J. Cosshall

    wayne Guest

    Hi Alan,

    Great post. You raise some good points.

    Let me give you my rationale for the site award:
    Firstly the images have to be great, which I think these are
    Now to the site. In many ways I agree with you in general, however I
    try to judge a site my its intended purpose and audience. I apply this
    to everything. If I was asked my opinion of someone's family snaps I
    would not judge it in the same way I would entries for the
    International Digital Art Award. This is not a site aimed at the
    general public. Rather it is a site of a professional photographer
    whose potential clients I suspect are at the middle to upper end of
    wedding/portrait photography clients. So they have money. They thus
    probably also have broadband. We are also talking about clients who
    will only visit the site a few times and are thus unlikely to get bored
    with the intro. So for such clients I think the site is fine.

    That's my view.

    Cheers,

    Wayne
     
    wayne, Nov 15, 2006
    #9
  10. Wayne J. Cosshall

    Sudee Guest

    We're not all city critters. Broadband (and cable) go where the highest
    density of potential customers are first. Then they take their own sweet
    time getting optical fiber, etc. out in rural areas. We couldn't get
    broadband where I live until about 6 months ago, and we still wouldn't
    have more than 2 or 3 TV stations if it weren't for satellite.

    Sue
     
    Sudee, Nov 15, 2006
    #10
  11. Wayne J. Cosshall

    Slack Guest


    I found her work to be incredibly well done. Her portrait work is amazing.

    I'm not a Flash fan either, but she did a great job on her site;
    professional and user friendly.... the chick is good!
     
    Slack, Nov 17, 2006
    #11
  12. I can justify it quite easily. Instead of 12 bucks a month it
    would cost me $120 a month for two sites, plus hardware.
    I can live without seeing every idiotic thing posted on the web.
    Good web designs load fairly fast with a good dialup connection.

    There has been internet via satellite for a while too but I
    justified not getting that either.
     
    Fletis Humplebacker, Nov 18, 2006
    #12

  13. You and Larry King. Except Larry doesn't even have dialup.


    rafe b
    www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    Raphael Bustin, Nov 18, 2006
    #13
  14. Wayne J. Cosshall

    kosh Guest


    so, the site has been slammed by many... personllay I like the
    photographers work... but it's bloody useless knowing a good American
    wedding photographer in AUSTRALIA!

    thanks for the cross-post!
     
    kosh, Nov 19, 2006
    #14
  15. Actually I figured even us Australians might learn something from
    looking at good photography and presentation. Afterall that is what the
    award is for, not to generate wedding work (directly).

    Cheers,

    Wayne
     
    Wayne J. Cosshall, Nov 20, 2006
    #15
  16. Hi Alan,

    Loved your post.
     
    Wayne J. Cosshall, Dec 10, 2006
    #16
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.